"When are Guards not Guards?" Topic

should all units with Guard in their title be treated the same?

thread for discussion here:

link

Going back to the Praetorian Guard, certainly later they were inferior to some of the more batte-hardened veteran legions. Likewise, there is always going to be a tendency for some countries to use their Guards regiments in basically non-combat roles. UK, Guards are elites, though other regiments are liable to be as good. Other countries, ?.

British Napoleonic Dragoon Guards? More Dragoons than Guards surely?

They used to be Horse regiments. When they were downgraded to dragoons (lower pay) they were given the guards title as a sop.

There are Guards and then there are Guards. I think the veteran soldiers of any army would know the difference between the pampered perfumed Guards and the real hard as nails Guards.

The Dragoon Guards were the first thing to come to my mind as well, since they were understood at the time not to be household troops, received no extra pay--which was part of the renaming, even--and so forth. But that's also true of the Garde de Paris, the Guards of Honor and the Garde Nationale. I'll admit I wince a bit at some of the Young Guard.
Generally, I tend to take the word of the country or sovereign, because the alternative can be really complicated, but assuming that in a points-based game, the owner has paid for the elite status. If it was a freebie, I'd be less generous.
I think the obvious alternative is to say troops come in various morale and training states, and you get what you pay for. You don't have to always have your best infantry in grenadier or guard uniforms, but most of us would.

My tuppen'orth:

TMP link

"Guard" and "elite" are the two most over-used words in the military lexicon

Some Guards units are indeed tough as nails, but some are just troops who get paid and fed on a regular basis

Look at the Russian Guard units in the SYW – never, ever left the environs of St. Petersburg

Look at the Russian Guard units in the SYW – never, ever left the environs of St. Petersburg

Neither did Catherine. They existed to guard the Tsarina, after all.

As for the Dragoon Guards, yes, that was an economy measure, and not just the pay, either. They could be mounted on smaller horses, as well. Not that it mattered much in game terms, given that British cavalry tended to be over-horsed in the first place.

Swiss Guards, about as military as my granny.

@foxweasel,

You should be more specific. I assume you are referring to the Papal Swiss Guards, but there were Swiss Guards in the French Army before the Revolution, and they were fine troops. And I would not be surprised if there were other Swiss units that bore the title of guards in various nations and times, since the Swiss supplied troops on a contract basis to about half the countries of Europe up until the end of the Napoleonic Wars.

Yes, I did mean the current ones.

An interesting point of view and one worthy of consideration.
perhaps belonging to a guard unit infers some morale benefit but as to the firing and fighting ability I would probably say not. Especially in the early eighteenth century where guard units were not held out of the fight unlike their later counterparts.
Of course agreeing with it and making it possible under game rules is a little more difficult. If you make a guard worth 3 points but a line only 2 points do you get 50% worth of benefits if there is only a morale plus for the guard?

Although we generally don't incorporate points systems into our rule sets we did a simple version in Donnybrook and have prepared another for larger battles but as yet not published it.
The main point for me is the difference between absolute and relative. The term Guard is relative but wargames rules and the views of the gamer are often absolute insofar as they seek direct comparison without ambiguity.
We could actually start a list of Guards and in doing so the problem becomes very clear as a starter..

The Grenadier Guards
Saddam's Republican Guard
The Maryland Guard Zouaves

Easy to sort out in terms of quality? perhaps..

but it is all relative to
when
where
who are you comparing them with and in what context..

Mabye not use the word "guard" as a grade in rules.

Elite is highest,
Then vetran/battle hardend
Drilled
Raw.

Sure most people might put Elite on all guard units, but atleast the word guard in the grading?

we've gone with a variation on that Truls

Foxweasal brings up the ceremonial vs. practical use of guards. The guys wearing the Renaissance uniforms, funny hats and carrying pole arms are performing a ceremonial function. For their practical mission of protecting the Pope, the Vatican Guard is well armed and well trained.

Which is a bit like the Foot Guards at Buckingham palace, purely ceremonial, the armed police do the actual guarding. But in reality, all British Infantry regiments are trained to the same standard, some are more aggressive (Paras) some more laidback (Rifles) and some more keen on polishing stuff (Guards)

When they roll crappy dice, obviously.

Swiss Guards, about as military as my granny.

The Vatican's Swiss Guards are actually a highly trained security force that also has a ceremonial function. So, unless your granny is a member of say the US Secret Service…

Not to mention that one of the basic requirements to join the Swiss Guard is to have completed training with the Swiss armed forces. If needed the Pontifical Swiss Guard is fully capable of converting into a company of light infantry though they probably lack heavier support weapons.

… when they are no longer guarding?

Quis custodiat custodies?